So, if you are going to say that 5% of men are abused and you are for equality, shouldn't that mean that 5% of resources allocated for abused people go to men?

So, if you are going to say that 5% of men are abused and you are for equality, shouldn't that mean that 5% of resources allocated for abused people go to men?

I was merely quoting what a previous poster said (95% of victims of domestic abuse in the US are women).

100% of resources should be allocated for 100% of abused people, don't you think?

If what a couple of posters have said, many men aren't reporting the abuse so how can allocations be made unless they make themselves known? That is why women are getting help & resources, cause a large amount are taking the difficult steps to report it. All this talk of equality is a smokescreen, clearly there was seen to be a need to provide this protection to women, presumably based of the amount of women reporting abuse & the case reaching court.

If what a couple of posters have said, many men aren't reporting the abuse so how can allocations be made unless they make themselves known? That is why women are getting help & resources, cause a large amount are taking the difficult steps to report it. All this talk of equality is a smokescreen, clearly there was seen to be a need to provide this protection to women, presumably based of the amount of women reporting abuse & the case reaching court.

I have already stated I agree with the move by Thonburi court.

My personal point (disregarding any other posters) is that there absolutely no reason why this cannot be extended to men regardless of whether they make up the minority of cases. No additional resources are required as the court is already divided.

I dont see mention that men would be refused the option if they wanted it. Until an abused man takes his abuser to court & requests the service then we will never know. But the point being that abused women have been without this option for many many years & had to face their abusers,which is intimidating & frightening to most victims but now have it due to their continued fight for it. That is the only way change is made, by coming forward & fighting for it.

I dont see mention that men would be refused the option if they wanted it. Until an abused man takes his abuser to court & requests the service then we will never know. But the point being that abused women have been without this option for many many years & had to face their abusers,which is intimidating & frightening to most victims but now have it due to their continued fight for it. That is the only way change is made, by coming forward & fighting for it.

I agree. I brought it up in response to some previous posters who belittled the male victims of abuse.

I would say however that I believe we should refer to victims rather than divide them into genders. As in issues of equality in employment, equal pay etc. where the emphasis is on "people" rather than distinctions based on gender or race.